Re: MD The SOL fallacy was the intelligence fallacy (was Rhetoric)

From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Sun Oct 23 2005 - 16:28:43 BST

  • Next message: Case: "RE: MD bullshit"
  • Next message: Case: "RE: MD bullshit"

    Scott

    21 Oct. you wrote to Gav

    > The problem is: what do you mean by "intellect per se"? And how is
    > intelligence different from that? The Greek word for that highest
    > level you refer to was 'nous', and the Latin equivalent was
    > 'intellectus'.

    The Greek word! No wonder. The Greeks were the first SOMists
    (or intellectual-ists in a MOQ context) and this is the way intellect
    likes to present itself: A mind that thinks while it really is the
    mind/matter divide itself.

    > One could translate it as 'intelligence' or as
    > 'intellect', but I'm not sure what the difference is.

    Can't you see that you are caught in the mind-idea world of the
    Greeks and that the MOQ is the first ever break-out from that
    confinement? And that Pirsig will not think like Barfield or Dewey
    or what names you have dropped since you began. I am however
    pleased that you and Mr. Maxwell have "found each other".

    > However, what I
    > object to is the characterization "beyond rational comprehension". It
    > certainly is "beyond rational comprehension", but that is because
    > reason is beyond rational comprehension. The word 'comprehension' (or
    > 'understanding') is, in much philosophy, used to refer to a lower
    > level of reason or intellect, where the higher level is that which
    > creates that which is subsequently understood or comprehended (like
    > differentiating between SQ and DQ). So my objection is that to speak
    > of being 'beyond rational comprehension', while true, has the tendency
    > to imply 'beyond reason', but the highest level is not 'beyond
    > reason', since it is reason. (Just to confuse things further, some
    > philosophers, like Cusa, use 'reason' for the lower level, and
    > 'intellect' for the upper, and some (e.g., Coleridge) reverse this,
    > but one just has to deal with that.)
     
    MOQ's 4th static level is S/O-reason, but not thinking because
    3rd. level people arrived at (still does) totally different results
    from the same data. Nor is it intelligence because 3rd. level
    people were just as smart as we are and did marvellous things in
    many fields.

    Bo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 23 2005 - 16:57:34 BST